EQ's... why doesnt everybody have one?

Audiophile grade? lets hope not!

Autoll, You don't use 861's in two channel, but Meridian Digital was always better to all my clients ears than the Levinson (same store) infact most clients laughed at the difference, so I'm quite sure the 861 will cruise to a win. If you clip the wings of a perfectly good surround processor and ask it play music crippled? The playing field is a bit more level I would agree.

I just recently DJ'd a group get together in Chicago comparing A TAG AV192 which out distanced the Meitner pre/dac 6 votes to 4 in a two channel head to head battle and then clearly won when TMS was used with room correction 9 to 1. So the 861 is quite capable as are other surround processors at lowly two channel tasks like being a two channel DAC.

I have used EQ's to dramatically improve the sound of a Meitner/Warner/ Kharma midi Exquisite system..... If you buy an EQ that is commiserate with your system performance it will greatly improve the sound of a system especially when the room is not treated well or you have "audiophile grade" speakers that need some help.

So DK89's system should expect a jump up in performance from his eq. His EQ is comisserate with his system, and no one wants to recognize that fine point. He's getting more performance out of his system maximizing his investment which is as "high end" as it gets in my book...but maybe he should have bought a $200 power cord for his Onkyo or $100 speaker cables that would have been more audiophile!

Problems with EQ is it takes discipline, additional tools and real knowledge to understand and implement. It is not as easy as you think (or atleast as I thought when I was trained), If your first instinct is to auto calibrate anything you don't want to go into EQ and Room Correction alone. My experience is that the normal intuition of the amateur/hobbyist end user usually has them doing the opposite adjustment needed to improve the sound. Doesn't mean they don't learn after time but instant success with an EQ should not be expected. Which is why they are panned here.

I think its very telling that the only "EQ" brands that exist in the audiophile consciousness is the ones that are marketed as "audiophile Grade" or are from a discount 5&10 store. There are plenty of EQ's that are "audiophile grade" and many more that would be insulted by the label

Just FYI.

Drubin, I appreciate the correction I was jammed for a word and i got it all wrong.

Just google my friend they are many as Onhwy61 (decidely not an audiophile in my opinion) has given you a nice leg up on some excellent lesser known analog ones you might not find on your own.

Unsound in my post I mentioned that someone new to equalization will be foiled by their own intuition. Your intuition is dragging you the wrong way at every turn, your inclination and posts are just the opposite of what is true. You're 180 degrees out of phase on the subject. :)

Joeylawn----My comments about Onhwy61 were sincerely complimentary.

:) and I think he knows that.

Unsound;

The Lake Contour/ Quad Mesa nearly sounds identical to the EMM DC2 in the "narrow" setting when used as strictly a DAC. Once you use it to tie in a subwoofer and EQ out the nasty's the EMM is a distant restrictive memory.

Considering its price and incredible palette of controls yes the future is now.

Jafox,

"So much of my favorite music is unlistenable because the poor recordings sound worse and worse as my system has improved. Quite an unfortunate dichotomy."

Actually your system is not improving if this is the case. Its been my experience that you may be able detect discern flaws in recordings as your system gets better but recordings should not become "unlistenable". You maybe making your system "brighter" (ie shifting its spectral balance) as you "improve" your system. The reason you have so much more "resolution" is because your system is emphasizing certain bands of frequencies over others.

"was then the system had more explosive life on the top. If there is one strength of Purist cables, it is their portrayal of dynamics."

As usual per audiophile rules of masochism the part you so dearly love is the part that is eliminating your enjoyment of so many of your recordings. Maybe that "explosive" exclusive live hf is alittle too much? Maybe ringing in the amplifier and the slight trimming of bass from the cables. etc.

"Quite an unfortunate dichotomy."

yes it is.

Well thanks Eld. and Onhwy, for catching on to what concerned me. "Unlistenable" is a strong word if ITS your favorite music, that's like having an ulcer and your favorite food is Mexican.

I don't want to go too far into this if it was just a misunderstanding on the semantic level, but I if your truly reducing a significant amount of your recordings to truly "unlistenable" then I'll expand, because my experiences disagree with what you're experiencing if we are on the same semantic level. Your reply seems to actually fit Onhwy's post that your high standards could be at fault in my misunderstanding.

Eldartford also points out a whole other can of worms.